Date: Mon, 18 Nov 1996 18:52:57 -0800 (PST) From: Tony Li <tli@jnx.com> To: dennis@etinc.com (dennis) Cc: isp@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: changed to: Frac T3? Message-ID: <199611190252.SAA14559@chimp.jnx.com> References: <199611182252.RAA01561@etinc.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>Here is a point though where Dennis will philosophically disagree with me, >and that is all right. Dennis makes a big point out of the fact that a >UNIX router can perform other services too... I do NOT believe in that >paradigm. So for me, specializing a UNIX kernel for a router would not >be a bad concept, but Dennis probably would not agree. I dont disagree (in fact we may have to do it to route T3), but it will be a specialized functions, not for everyone. In fact, there is a _great_ deal of painful experience in dealing with routers where there isn't quite enough CPU time to get everything done. Routing protocols are basically soft real-time distributed systems. When they get delayed, they tend to collapse in spectacular ways. As a result, putting any significant non-routing load on a router is a _really_ bad idea. You MIGHT be able to get away with it by suitable modifications to the Unix scheduler, but then it wouldn't be Unix, would it? ;-) And the cost of another box to support a server is sufficiently low that it would seem to make sense not to risk the routing... Tony
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199611190252.SAA14559>